Amazing accomplishment. Even more amazing is that Mike Trout is actually having a better season and deserves the MVP over Cabrerra.

I agree. He's more valuable to any team in baseball than Cabrera.

But, let's not forget: sabermetrics don't auto-calculate the MVP. He might crush Cabrera on WAR, but he didn't put his team into the post-season like Cabrera did. The 28 writers who vote for the MVP loves that shit. It's very unlikely to win the MVP without making the playoffs. Not saying I agree with that 100%, but precedent is precedent. But boy, the Angels sure were close this year. Had they made it, it probably would have gone to Trout.

The Triple Crown isn't a guarantee of a MVP. Just ask Teddy Ballgame (who won the Crown twice, and got beat for the MVP award both times). Or Gehrig.

It's funny - early sabermetrics under-valued base running and defense. Now we see a more balanced approach. And that's where Cabrera gets pinched (13 errors to 4 errors; 120 runs for Trout; almost 50 stolen bases). That said, Trout sure did strike out a lot....the worst sin in baseball as a hitter.

I think it goes to Cabrera because his team made the playoffs. I don't agree - I would give it to Trout. But I think that's how the voting will go. If Detroit makes the World Series, then it's a lock for Cabrera.

I would give the MVP to Cabrera...he closed the season stronger and was a superior hitter in late inning AB's...particuarly with RISP. Plus...it's the Triple Crown. It's batting .400 or winning 30 games....but it's still impressive. Cabrera has lead the league in BA twice as a RH hitter with zero speed. He's a historically significant talent. And in saying that I don't mean to sound dimissive of Trout...he's a tremendously talented player...he hs the pure ability to be his generation's GOAT, I just don't think he gets the big award this year.

And FWIW...I see no evidence that he's used PED's...ever. I don't see any of the bizaare jumps in performance associated with using PEDS.

But, let's not forget: sabermetrics don't auto-calculate the MVP. He might crush Cabrera on WAR, but he didn't put his team into the post-season like Cabrera did. The 28 writers who vote for the MVP loves that shit. It's very unlikely to win the MVP without making the playoffs. Not saying I agree with that 100%, but precedent is precedent. But boy, the Angels sure were close this year. Had they made it, it probably would have gone to Trout.

The Triple Crown isn't a guarantee of a MVP. Just ask Teddy Ballgame (who won the Crown twice, and got beat for the MVP award both times). Or Gehrig.

It's funny - early sabermetrics under-valued base running and defense. Now we see a more balanced approach. And that's where Cabrera gets pinched (13 errors to 4 errors; 120 runs for Trout; almost 50 stolen bases). That said, Trout sure did strike out a lot....the worst sin in baseball as a hitter.

I think it goes to Cabrera because his team made the playoffs. I don't agree - I would give it to Trout. But I think that's how the voting will go. If Detroit makes the World Series, then it's a lock for Cabrera.

In full agreement that the writers will vote in Cabrerra, and the reasons behind it. I still think it's not right.

I also appreciate your insights into the advanced metrics side, but I'm definitely not going with this solely based on WAR. I have a problem with the defensive side of that equation, most notably because the creators of the stat themselves have admitted it takes a sample of 3 years to ensure accuracy. It can be simpler than that - Trout had a stellar offensive year, leading Cabrerra in most advanced metrics, but even simpler ones like OBP, played insane defensive at the most valuable outfield position while Miguel was a butcher at third, and led the league in stolen bases with an incredible success rate.

My problem is the triple crown has too much emphasis on stats that don't translate to real value, in terms of awarding the MVP. It's a nice, rare accomplishment, but OBP, wOBA, wRC+ etc give better context. Also, if Josh Hamiltion hit two HRs on the last day, would people still want Cabrerra to win? Also - Anaheim won more games than Detroit, so Cabrerra gets rewarded just because he played in the weakest division.

But, I will disagree with the strikeout being baseball's biggest sin - a double play is far worse. Strikeouts would also have a more positive effect since, in theory, the batter would see more pitchers than a first pitch pop up, etc.....

In full agreement that the writers will vote in Cabrerra, and the reasons behind it. I still think it's not right.

I also appreciate your insights into the advanced metrics side, but I'm definitely not going with this solely based on WAR. I have a problem with the defensive side of that equation, most notably because the creators of the stat themselves have admitted it takes a sample of 3 years to ensure accuracy. It can be simpler than that - Trout had a stellar offensive year, leading Cabrerra in most advanced metrics, but even simpler ones like OBP, played insane defensive at the most valuable outfield position while Miguel was a butcher at third, and led the league in stolen bases with an incredible success rate.

My problem is the triple crown has too much emphasis on stats that don't translate to real value, in terms of awarding the MVP. It's a nice, rare accomplishment, but OBP, wOBA, wRC+ etc give better context. Also, if Josh Hamiltion hit two HRs on the last day, would people still want Cabrerra to win? Also - Anaheim won more games than Detroit, so Cabrerra gets rewarded just because he played in the weakest division.

But, I will disagree with the strikeout being baseball's biggest sin - a double play is far worse. Strikeouts would also have a more positive effect since, in theory, the batter would see more pitchers than a first pitch pop up, etc.....

I agree. BA is over-rated. And RBI's are grossly over-rated. The triple crown harkens back to a simpler time in statistical measures. It's still kind of neat to see it happen...one of the most rare feats in baseball, even if the stats aren't as meaningful. It was nice to see it happen in my lifetime. I would not have picked Cabrera to do it. I guess I would have picked Frank Thomas, or Bonds, or Pujols to have done it.

So you think a double play is worse? I would agree the outcome of the double play is worse than the outcome of the strikeout. But the process of trying to put a ball in play is more advantageous, statistically speaking, than the process of striking out. The process of putting a ball in play can lead to outcomes that produce runs, perhaps if errors are made, or if fast baserunners leg out an infield hit. The process of striking out produces a zero statistical probability of scoring a run, unless the runner advances on a past ball, for example. The outcome of getting into a double play, though, sucks worse.

So, I think we agree here. The outcome of the double play is far more injurious than a strikeout. But the actual process of putting a ball in play is more advantageous than not putting a ball in play at all, if we look at potential outcomes. One is obviously a double play, but another could be a run producing outcome.

That's why I feel a strikeout is the biggest sin. It gives the team a near zero probability of scoring a run. But I think it's kind of stupid on my part to argue with you on this...let's agree that both are pretty crappy!

I would give the MVP to Cabrera...he closed the season stronger and was a superior hitter in late inning AB's...particuarly with RISP. Plus...it's the Triple Crown. It's batting .400 or winning 30 games....but it's still impressive. Cabrera has lead the league in BA twice as a RH hitter with zero speed. He's a historically significant talent. And in saying that I don't mean to sound dimissive of Trout...he's a tremendously talented player...he hs the pure ability to be his generation's GOAT, I just don't think he gets the big award this year.

And FWIW...I see no evidence that he's used PED's...ever. I don't see any of the bizaare jumps in performance associated with using PEDS.

I'd also give it to Cabrera because the guy put up the numbers in 161 games. Trout played in 139 games I believe. Some may say that putting up huge numbers in less game is more impressive but those people are wrong. Baseball is a fcking grind. And having over 20 days resting instead of in the mix is huge.

I'd also give it to Cabrera because the guy put up the numbers in 161 games. Trout played in 139 games I believe. Some may say that putting up huge numbers in less game is more impressive but those people are wrong. Baseball is a fcking grind. And having over 20 days resting instead of in the mix is huge.

I see the point in terms of % based stats, but in terms of absolute numbers, like stolen bases, less games absolutely makes the it more impressive.

I agree. BA is over-rated. And RBI's are grossly over-rated. The triple crown harkens back to a simpler time in statistical measures. It's still kind of neat to see it happen...one of the most rare feats in baseball, even if the stats aren't as meaningful. It was nice to see it happen in my lifetime. I would not have picked Cabrera to do it. I guess I would have picked Frank Thomas, or Bonds, or Pujols to have done it.

So you think a double play is worse? I would agree the outcome of the double play is worse than the outcome of the strikeout. But the process of trying to put a ball in play is more advantageous, statistically speaking, than the process of striking out. The process of putting a ball in play can lead to outcomes that produce runs, perhaps if errors are made, or if fast baserunners leg out an infield hit. The process of striking out produces a zero statistical probability of scoring a run, unless the runner advances on a past ball, for example. The outcome of getting into a double play, though, sucks worse.

So, I think we agree here. The outcome of the double play is far more injurious than a strikeout. But the actual process of putting a ball in play is more advantageous than not putting a ball in play at all, if we look at potential outcomes. One is obviously a double play, but another could be a run producing outcome.

That's why I feel a strikeout is the biggest sin. It gives the team a near zero probability of scoring a run. But I think it's kind of stupid on my part to argue with you on this...let's agree that both are pretty crappy!

It is so hard to bat for both average AND power on the major league level. There's a reason it's been over 45 years since the last triple crown winner. Hats off to Cabrera. Awesome accomplishment for one hell of a ball player.

It is so hard to bat for both average AND power on the major league level. There's a reason it's been over 45 years since the last triple crown winner. Hats off to Cabrera. Awesome accomplishment for one hell of a ball player.